Project Reality Forums

INS can still take the Engineer kit, bomb bikes ftw

And how do you explain rounds that don't end in Blufor winning? I'd say those guys had the luck to have decently defendable caches (don't blame C4 for bad mapping) and managed to muster a decent defense.

Going off of the way people are posting in this thread it's as if C4 has killed every cache since it was known that it can defeat a defense by blowing through a wall. I mean we would never, ever, ever see Marines blowing holes through Afghan houses/streets/villages to avoid possibly casualties, would we?

Also if you know me you know I prefer insurgence over blufor when I do play INS.

Murphy wrote: how do you explain rounds that don't end in Blufor winning? I'd say those guys had the luck to have decently defendable caches (don't blame C4 for bad mapping) and managed to muster a decent defense.

Going off of the way people are posting in this thread it's as if C4 has killed every cache since it was known that it can defeat a defense by blowing through a wall.

you didn't have a reply for boris' comment?

i'll answer your question with my own. its possible for every single one of us to get some hacks right now, but why aren't we? thats why i dont grab a CE kit and drop c4 from choppers. but its not stopping people right now, probably because they are like you and legitimize it or because the devs haven't fixed it so its seen as normal.

i think the devs just made a mistake in thinking that c4 should still be able to destroy the cache. they went so far to stop lonewolves by making more incindiarys required. so it doesn't really make sense that it would stay this way gameplay wise.

Sometime C4 is the only way to destroy a cache that is booby trapped or in a cave and I don't find it unrealistc or extremely impacting. Many real life situations where caves were simply blown up. Even if caches did require two C4s, most of the time the C4 is going to kill everyone around the cache and it can easily be finished off with a thermal or two. Would you really want to be blown up on the cache and still have a cache there that no one is defending anyway? If you don't want your cache to be C4d, then get more civis in your squad and go outside.

like already been said. it should take 3-4 C4s to destroy a cache, it will stop lonewolfing.

It would be real nice to see a bigger explosion after a cache. and even maybe a bigger cache that looks like real ammo boxes that have weapons in it

C4 in a blackhawk circling over a cache, where are your techies?

The majority of counter arguments being brought up are basically pointing out poor defenses, that were most likely whittled down enough to allow C4 to be planted. The Devs have given OPFOR enough tools to handle anything thrown their way, you may not agree with a-symmetrical balancing but there is always a counter. The counter for C4 being the most simple/complex solution, pay attention and don't turtle up.

As far as I can tell C4 is the Blufors balance against an INS team who decides to concede all ground to the enemy and hide in their caves/buildings. It's a stupid choice that happens far too often, and then people act surprised when a squad walks up and C4s the cache building/cave.

So if the ins don't turtle up, the expose themselves the the coalition's vastly superior weapons and assets. What I'm basically reading is that you think Ins should try to play conventional hardball with an area defence without any of the tools you actually rely on for a conventional area defence. Seems fair, right?

Insy is a rotten mode. The desire to give the coalition a realistic overmatch in every area is admirable, but pointless since all the insurgent's advantages can't be translated into a 3 hour round or a BF2 mod. Having said this, the devs are so blufor focussed that I don't think there's really been a credible effort to model ins strength in a rewarding way since about 0.6...

Mode needs a real overhaul, so many individual things wrong with it, so many complex and pervasive things wrong with it as well....

I dont understand how people keep going back to this method. Sure, it can be a decently cheap thrill once or twice to pull off a C4 tard rush, but dosent it get old? So many seasoned veterans of PR view this method as a textbook play for INS.

I have always said that I would gladly lose a round as blufor and have a hell of a fight doing it, than win via the path of least resistance. I recognize that the fight isnt all of PR's appeal to most players, but that is when I am having the most fun. When I am out numbered, out gunned, and running on a plan-as-you-go last second hunch, and yet I best my foes and take their prize by standing over it and watching it burn. As such, I can advocate cache C4-ing, in one way; put it on the cache directly. You have earned your tickets at that point.

Walmarx wrote:I dont understand how people keep going back to this method. Sure, it can be a decently cheap thrill once or twice to pull off a C4 tard rush, but dosent it get old? So many seasoned veterans of PR view this method as a textbook play for INS.

Because they play for win. Makes them feel good, importan, whatnot. Exploit every dirty trick, just to win.

Such people are no better than COD kids. PR should be played for the immersion. Play to win is what tournaments are for.

Truism wrote:So if the ins don't turtle up, the expose themselves the the coalition's vastly superior weapons and assets. What I'm basically reading is that you think Ins should try to play conventional hardball with an area defence without any of the tools you actually rely on for a conventional area defence. Seems fair, right?

If you play running straight into the enemy so be it, you may not grasp the concept of Optics vs Iron Sights. I never once said go out and play it like AAS, and even if I did the idea is fairly straight forward; Flag defense with a cache instead of a flag.

Truism wrote:The desire to give the coalition a realistic overmatch in every area is admirable, but pointless since all the insurgent's advantages can't be translated into a 3 hour round or a BF2 mod. Having said this, the devs are so blufor focussed that I don't think there's really been a credible effort to model ins strength in a rewarding way since about 0.6.....

SPGs (both techie and emplacements), Mortars, better maps offering more flanking/break out opportunities, and I'd bet the list goes on so you're just over dramatizing it.

Arnoldio wrote:Because they play for win. Makes them feel good, importan, whatnot. Exploit every dirty trick, just to win.

Such people are no better than COD kids. PR should be played for the immersion. Play to win is what tournaments are for.

The game is the game and nothing more. The game doesn't care about whats "cheap", whats unfair or unrealistic, by default it understands only winning and losing. Its ludicrous to claim people aren't "playing the game properly" because they don't follow someone else's arbitrary ideas of what the game is, because they don't understand the made up rules someone else has placed on top of the game. Those are your rules, follow them if it interests you but they are not a part of the game.

The victory condition of PR is not to "be the most immersed", it is to drain the other teams tickets or to destroy their caches. Anything else is pure fantasy.

We are however human, and fun is why I play - winning is secondary.

C4ing through walls is a cheap tactic IMHO, would be nice to render C4 - cache damage low enough so 1 isn't enough.

Gone back through the thread and the only people who like C4ing caches are ALL in the same clan.

PLODDITHANLEY wrote: Gone back through the thread and the only people who like C4ing caches are ALL in the same clan.

Not true. Read thread again..

Web_cole wrote:The game is the game and nothing more. The game doesn't care about whats "cheap", whats unfair or unrealistic, by default it understands only winning and losing. Its ludicrous to claim people aren't "playing the game properly" because they don't follow someone else's arbitrary ideas of what the game is, because they don't understand the made up rules someone else has placed on top of the game. Those are your rules, follow them if it interests you but they are not a part of the game.

The victory condition of PR is not to "be the most immersed", it is to drain the other teams tickets or to destroy their caches. Anything else is pure fantasy.

I never said it was wrong though, so if one plays it with C4 on the caches, thats fine by me.

Question though... Why dont you bunny hop?

PLODDITHANLEY wrote:We are however human, and fun is why I play - winning is secondary.

"Fun" means different things to different people. Here's what I find "fun", enjoyable, what gives me satisfaction in PR:



Winning.

PLODDITHANLEY wrote:C4ing through walls is a cheap tactic IMHO, would be nice to render C4 - cache damage low enough so 1 isn't enough.

Gone back through the thread and the only people who like C4ing caches are ALL in the same clan.

I never said I liked it, its broken and should be fixed, but its not broken enough to be considered glitching. If the game allows you to do something that is truly broken, then that's the games fault and not the players for exploiting it. If something is so broken as to have zero possible counters, e.g. glitching inside a building and shooting out, that is when it should be considered an illegal move. C4ing through walls is not that.

Arnoldio wrote:I never said it was wrong though, so if one plays it with C4 on the caches, thats fine by me.

Question though... Why dont you bunny hop?

I don't consider it be effective in PR, except possibly as a last dive into cover, in which case I would do it, assuming it wasn't against the server rules.

Web_cole wrote:If the game allows you to do something that is truly broken, then that's the games fault and not the players for exploiting it.

The day I find myself jumping for joy for winning a computer game is the day I jump out a window.

Where to draw the line?

C4ing caches
Deploying FOB's on enemies
Jack in the box shooting
Bunny Hopping
HATing enemy armour leaving main

Mj Pain wrote:Not true. Read thread again..

Only went back two pages didn't check beyond that as its a bit necro before

This all boils down to the same argument, the need to win at all costs to have fun, and the like to have fun whatever crowd.

If you have to win to have fun, life won't always be fun.

PLODDITHANLEY wrote:The day I find myself jumping for joy for winning a computer game is the day I jump out a window.

Heh, I might not have jumped for joy but I've Tiger-Woods-Fist-Pumped quite a few times

PLODDITHANLEY wrote:Where to draw the line?

C4ing caches
Deploying FOB's on enemies
Jack in the box shooting
Bunny Hopping
HATing enemy armour leaving main

Would you get rid of all of those? What next, no dropping a patch on someone before you revive them? Would you ban people for looking out of the corner of their screen, or for dropping crates through a fence? Both teams must cap all the flags completely in order and then meet up in the middle of the map for a nice, sporting 18th century line battle?

I agree, drawing the line is difficult. But its just as relevant to say "Where do you draw the line" at the other end of the spectrum, and for me it makes the most sense to draw the least amount of lines possible.

PLODDITHANLEY wrote:If you have to win to have fun, life won't always be fun.

Winning isn't just about winning, intrinsically its also about the pursuit of victory and bettering ones self through that pursuit.

Web_cole wrote:Winning isn't just about winning, intrinsically its also about the pursuit of victory and bettering ones self through that pursuit.

But if your aim is to better yourself at the game, why use cheap tactics and exploits? How is that "bettering ones self"? Surely winning through a well laid out plan would show a higher degree of skill and understanding of the game.

About drawing the line, I like to think as more of a game etiquette, you don't C4 caches as it's an unfair advantage over the INS team, you don't HAT enemy armor leaving main because where's the fair fight in that? A level playing ground can make a round on PR a thousand times better than any stacked games, one reason why organized events can be so good.

Kingy wrote:But if your aim is to better yourself at the game, why use cheap tactics and exploits? How is that "bettering ones self"? Surely winning through a well laid out plan would show a higher degree of skill and understanding of the game.

You appear to be making the assumption that there are ways of winning that are more worthy of merit than others. Again, to go back to what I said previously; that's not a part of the game, that's a concept outwith the game. You don't "win more" by doing something more difficult, the game doesn't care that what you did was "cheap", or that you are an "honourable player" who won't stoop to their level, the game understands only winning and losing.

What happens in most competative (PvP) games is that these so called "cheap" or "overpowered" tactics become normal play, and in doing so counter strategies or ways of dealing with them are discovered and refined. That tends not to happen in this community as a lot of people just don't want to use them in the first place, and so they don't understand their use and never get a chance to work out how to deal with them.

Web_cole wrote:Would you get rid of all of those? What next, no dropping a patch on someone before you revive them? Would you ban people for looking out of the corner of their screen, or for dropping crates through a fence? Both teams must cap all the flags completely in order and then meet up in the middle of the map for a nice, sporting 18th century line battle?

Actually yes, those too.

Web_cole wrote:...the game understands only winning and losing.

That tends not to happen in this community as a lot of people just don't want to use them in the first place, and so they don't understand their use and never get a chance to work out how to deal with them.

Game only knows win and lose, other players don't.

That part is true indeed. However, hopefully it will stay that way and not everybody will resort to such winning tactics.

Isn't it funny, most of the time in BF3 i use M16 as the marine (or some otherstandard issue rifle for that factions), just to play along. I never go for the most OP weapon.